100 GINKGO. 



(original specimen in the Sedgwick Museum), -which, is also named 

 by Buckman StricMandia acuminata, is, I believe, distinct from that 

 to which the name was origLaally applied. 



The resemblance between the specimens shown in PL XI. Fig. 3 

 and in Text-fig. 9 and some of the leaves from the Inferior Oolite 

 of Yorkshire is so close that we cannot separate them without 

 unduly exaggerating the importance of the slight difference in 

 geological horizon. A comparison may be made between the 

 Cirencester leaf (Text-fig. 9) and the Japanese species described by 

 Tokoyama as Ginkgodium Nathorsti ; ' but I do not regard the latter 

 as identical with the type from Yorkshire and Stonesfield. 



V. 3429. PI. XI. Fig. 3. 



An imperfect leaf, 5"5 cm. broad, similar to that figured by 

 Buckman in 1845 as t NoeggeratMa?' The lamina shows a deep 

 median sinus, and is traversed by numerous dichotomously branched 

 veins. 



Eyeford (Stonesfield Slate). Brodie Coll. 



V. 3433. The original of Buckman's ?iVo«^^e?-«<A«a. Abilobed 

 leaf like that shown in PL XI. Fig. 3. 



Eyeford. Brodie Coll. 



Text-fig. 9. 



This specimen from Eyeford (Cirencester Museum) is more 

 perfect than the smaller leaf shown in Fig. 3, PL XI. ; part of the 

 petiole is preserved, and the lamina is broader than in the British 

 Museum specimen. A reduced drawing of this leaf has already 

 been published in the Annals of Botany as an example of Oinlcgo- 

 digitata.^ 



Eyeford. Cirencester Museum Coll. 



Other specimens from Eyeford : — V. 3427 (veins fairly distinct), 

 V. 3430, V. 3434. 



Brodie Coll. 



• Yokoyama (89), pi. viii. 



^ Murchison (45), pi. i. fig. 5. 



3 Seward & Gowan (00), pi. x. fig. 69. 



